Should you believe in the trinity II

[Simonline]

This makes no sense. Mighter than absolute reality? what does that mean?
Ah ok you're saying absolute reality is YHWH almighty. I disagree, YHWH almighty is YHWH almighty.
and you have no scripture that says Jesus is YHWH. and you have no scripture saying God is absolute reality. in fact you are tho only one i have ever heard in my 37 years as a christian ever say that.. and we are doomed to hell if we don't b elieve you when you say YHWH is ab solute reality? oh man.
false representation. As a card carriing heretic, and proud of it, I do not believe Jesus is a sinful human creature nor do I believe he is a lesser god or any kind of god.

those verses say nothing of the sort, you just interpret them that way. you have no scripture anywhere saying anything about incarnation, or Jesus being YHWH.
you need to read the scriptures you quote that verse says nothing about incarnate. No wonder you have to resort to no comment t o my rebutals.

Acts 4:12 And in none other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved.

anybody see incarnate in that verse?????!!!!!




nope. Jesus is a different kind of savior than God, Jesus is our saviour because he died for us, and God is our savior because he accepted chists payment for our sins, they are one savior in purpose, not in being.

you prob. didn't consider that alternate interpretation.\
wrong. Jesus said "before abraham was I am (he)." I am or ego emi is not how the divine name is translated in scritpure. the divine name is translated kurios or lord. look it up.

lots of people said I am, like the blind man, someone saying I am doesn't mean they are claiming to be god, and even if I am is the divine name in john 8.58 Jesus isn't claiming to be YHWH but merely uttering his name. you read it erroniously like Jesus said "before abraham was, I am the I am." it odn't say that. two readings on rev. 1.8
(Darby) Revelation 1:8 I am the Alpha and the Omega, saith [the] Lord God, he who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.

not Jesus .

rev. 1.11 says nothign about Jesus being YHWH not even remotely.

(Darby) Revelation 1:11 saying, What thou seest write in a book, and send to the seven assemblies: to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea

rev. 21.6 has variant readings in Greek manuscripts.

(Rotherham) Revelation 21:6 And he said unto me--Accomplished! I, am the A, and the Z, the Beginning and the End: I, unto him that is thirsting, will give of the fountain of the water of life, freely:
the verse doesn't say Jesus is the almighty. it says he is the a and the Z and rev. 1.11 says god is the A and the Z. the logical interpretation is not that Jesus is his own daddy and is therefore God, but that they are one, as Jesus said, and that god is in christ, as scripture says, thus the are A and z in a figurative sense in that they are one in purpose.
I think that's enough to show what those scriptures actually say, and what they say isn't your interpretation. your intrprerttation isn't scirpture.

No comment

Simonline.

 

[2ducklow]

Of course, it goes without saying that I completely disagree with this blatant distortion of the Truth.

Simonline.

what happened to no comment?

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

what happened to no comment?

question, how much more of this verbal punishment can you take. You have presented a very valid point in your post 317 and all your opponent does is ignore your points and insult you time after time.

1. To me, your opponent is incapable of addressing any arguments. So, why continue.

2. Your opponent is very disrespectful, his theology is extremely contradictory and ridicules that i doubt anybody gives him any credibility! So, why should you? His Trinitarian veiw is not an Orthodox Christian one, so definition he is an Unorthodox Trinitarian!

3. Your opponent hardly ever quotes scriptures in his argument. If you ask me, all i see is lots of wacky philosophy and conjecturing, no straight forward biblical answers. I ignore all of his post for they are not only long and rude, but they never address the actual point presented in an argument. I submite that he uses this strategy not to only cloud the actual arguments that undermine his wacky philosophy. But also in efforts that through those long and lengthy posts, (which most of what he posts, which is about 99.9% of what he posts, is all personal attacks), and through those personal attacks, he hopes and sometimes is successful in accomplishing that the viewers forget the actual arguments that destroy his philosophies from it's fundation. To be honest, HE HAS NO ARGUMENT, so lets put this to rest!

4. And lastly, "the no comment excuse" is simply another vain and ridicules excuse to run away from an actual argument, something he is incapable of mustering!

Chao!

 

[2ducklow]

question, how much more of this verbal punishment can you take. You have presented a very valid point in your post 317 and all your opponent does is ignore your points and insult you time after time.

I just tune it out. It's hard for me to get angry when someone is so totally off base with their accusations against me. Besides I find those vicious insults repetative and comically entertaining.

1. To me, your opponent is incapable of addressing any arguments. So, why continue.

2. Your opponent is very disrespectful, his theology is extremely contradictory and ridicules that i doubt anybody gives him any credibility! So, why should you? His Trinitarian veiw is not an Orthodox Christian one, so definition he is an Unorthodox Trinitarian!

3. Your opponent hardly ever quotes scriptures in his argument. If you ask me, all i see is lots of wacky philosophy and conjecturing, no straight forward biblical answers. I ignore all of his post for they are not only long and rude, but they never address the actual point presented in an argument. I submite that he uses this strategy not to only cloud the actual arguments that undermine his wacky philosophy. But also in efforts that through those long and lengthy posts, (which most of what he posts, which is about 99.9% of what he posts, is all personal attacks), and through those personal attacks, he hopes and sometimes is successful in accomplishing that the viewers forget the actual arguments that destroy his philosophies from it's fundation. To be honest, HE HAS NO ARGUMENT, so lets put this to rest!

4. And lastly, "the no comment excuse" is simply another vain and ridicules excuse to run away from an actual argument, something he is incapable of mustering!

Chao!

well, it demonstrates to any serious seekers that trinitarians have no response to very serious problems with their doctrine except 'no comment' or to ignore the problem completely. I expect a no comment in soime form or other for they have no other option. I think when someone demonstrates an utter contempt for me simply because I am debating with them,or disagree with them that it only goes to show the association between the inquisition and trinity, and trinity and their utter contempt for me, It is avery mild form of the inquisition. Most people consider the inquisition a very negative thing, but not everyone of course. So asscoicating contempt for me with a defence of trinity, only serves to disprove it. The inquisition soughtto make believers through duress, insulting people in a debate is a way of silencing people through duress, same thing. It's also proof through intimidation.

I mean someone's gonna say "dude if you gotta insult people to prove your doctrine, then no thanks I don't want it." So CF is helping us disproof trinity by allowing trintiarians to verbally insult people vicously who disagree with them.

from my perspective, for my benifit, I get to think through thiings in my response, search the scritprues, and increase my understan ding, so even if no one reads it, I at least get some benifit.

 

[yashualover]

No comment

Simonline.

http://vintage.aomin.org/CHALC.html

 

[2ducklow]

http://vintage.aomin.org/CHALC.html

Good example. the site explains what trinitarians beleive and why they believe it, and there explanation of the serious problems of logic that that belief entails is basically 'no comment'. Proving once again my point that the only explanation there is for the serious fundamental flaws of reason and logic in trinity is 'no comment.'

"Jesus cannot be analyzed and calculated. But whoever speaks of him in human words is entering into the realm of "rational" speech. There is no unique language for the realm of the incalculable and the "irrational." Thus, where we express "eschatological history," the origin and the goal, God's reality in the man Jesus, our language collapses; it becomes paradoxical. We could also say that our language then expresses awe. It says those things which leave men "speechless." Its terms are not then a means for grasping but rather for making known that we have been grasped. It is not then a form of mastery, but testimony to the overpowering experience which has come upon man."

http://vintage.aomin.org/CHALC.html





so he admits they can't explain it, and no rational speech can explain it, so again no comment is the only out.

he is saying jesus can't be explained with rational speech = no comment

he says if they try and explain with rational speech, they just contradict themselves, so again, = no comment

he says if they try and explain it men will be speechless cause it makes no rational sense = no comment

he says trinity isn't meant to be understood, = no comment.

thank you for that excellent example.






example of serious fundamental flaw with trinity, You name 3 different Gods, and refuse to add them up till you call each one something else, say person of God, then you have no difficulty adding them up.
trinitarian response, explanations of God are not rational, don't expect to be able to understand our explantions = no comment.

Fundamental flaw of logic in trinity #2. How can Jesus be 2 persons, god and man? Trintarian answer, Don't expect a rational explantation, cause our doctrine about god cannot be grasped. don't try and understand it c ause it isn't rational and we dont' even try to be rational. rational is a sin when talking about God, = no comment.

So really every time trinitarians make their illogical nonsensical declarations of their beliefs, such as Jesus has 2 natures, or 3 persons are one God, they need to preceed it with the admitted fact above that their explanations are not meant to be understood, anre contradictorey and irrational but it's oke cause they are interpreting scripture and thats the ony way to intepret scripture about God, namely in an irrational, incomprehensible way. Otherwise some people, and some do, acutally think what they say makes some kind of sense, which James white admits here , they don't.

 

[yashualover]

I accept the Trinity because it is clearily taught in scripture.

I am very happy that I serve a God that can not be fully understand by us mortals, otherwise that god would not be diety.

 

[GeorgeTwo]

I accept the Trinity because it is clearily taught in scripture.

I agree with you.

I am very happy that I serve a God that can not be fully understand by us mortals, otherwise that god would not be diety.

Reminds me of something Arthur Balfour said:

"A religion small enough for our undertanding would not be large enough for our needs."

 

[YeshuamySalvation]

I accept the Trinity because it is clearily taught in scripture.

I am very happy that I serve a God that can not be fully understand by us mortals, otherwise that god would not be diety.

Then why in the world do you try to comprehend him logically when you attempt to confront heresy, like Nestorianism, Arianism ect ect etc? If he cannot be understood then why all the fight on whats heresy and what is not? You should just say he works like that because scripture says so, but no one can truly understand how he does so, while avoiding of-course all the theological and philosophical jargon Christians propagate.

 

[2ducklow]

I accept the Trinity because it is clearily taught in scripture.

I am very happy that I serve a God that can not be fully understand by us mortals, otherwise that god would not be diety.

Giving irrational explantations about God is not going beyond our understanding it is going below our understanding.

irrationality is confusion, God is not the author of confusion

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.


God said to understand the mystery of God which is christ,

Colossians 2:2 that their hearts may be comforted, they being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, that they may know the mystery of God, even Christ,

So you offer irrational explanations about christ, 2 beings that are one being, god and man in your effort to not un derstand him and be irrational in your explanations so no one understands fully , as god wants us to, Christ.

Where is your scripture that says god is irrationa therefore explanations of God should be irrational?
If irrational, contradictory, incomprehensible explanations of God are correct and the only possible intepretation of scriptures. So like Yeshuamysalvation says, why try and explain God rationally when you admit he can't be explained rationally? It's only rarely that someone like James white admits that their explanations are irrational, incomprehensible and contradictory,all the rest of the majority of the time you trinitarians try and explain your doctrine as rationally, comprehensibly and non contradictory as you possibly can? why do you try and hide it most of the time and do just the opposite of what you believe? looks like deception to me when you try and explain God rationally when you believe there is no rational explanation of scriptures about God.


Why don't you guys say

"there is no rational explanation of God or the trinity, but let me offer this rational expllanation, god is like an egg 3 parts but one egg, There a throughly rational explanation for trinity, but of course there are no rational explanations for trinity."


cause that in effect is what you do. you just don't put your two xtatements that close together, And rarely even admit to the irrationality of it.


No Simonline has the correct approach, state your nonsensical doctrine, and say no comment to anyone who brings up the irrtationality of it. just don't deal with it or try to explain it, it's the most honest approach.

 

[yashualover]

There are many things beyond our rational in scripture, do we call it confusion? No, we embrace it because YHWH has written it and He is holy pure and perfect beyond our intellect.

For example:

Creation: How is something created from nothing.

Miricles: Dead raised, serious incurable diseases healed, water changed into wine etc...

We study and reach conclusions to measure of what the holy spirit will allow.

 

[clmanning]

If the Father is the One True God, and the Son is the One True God than how can the Father be greater than the Son? Jn 14:28 "You have heard how I have said to you, I go away and am coming to you again. If you loved me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for my Father is greater than I." The Trinitarian doctrine cannot be reconciled with this statement made by Yeshua Himself.

 

[clmanning]

Nothing could be further from the Truth. The idea that no-one but God Himself knows whether or not He is Tri-Personal or Mono-Personal in Nature is a lie. God, through the Word, has revealed Himself as Tri-Personal and He expects us to both uphold and proclaim that Truth to the world as something that is both Eternally and Immutably Absolute Reality. It is not up for discussion or debate (as if the majority opinion of sinful finite human creatures could change the very Nature of Absolute Reality (how imbecilically arrogant we are)?!)

You are absolutely right!! It is extremely arrogant and imbecillical to believe that since the majority of christian denominations teach the doctrine of the trinity then it must be true.

The plain truth of the matter is that there is abundant Scriptural evidence to support the doctrine of the trinity and there is also abundant Scriptural evidence to deny the doctrine of the trinity. There are many Scriptures that cannot be reconciled with the doctrine of the trinity by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[clmanning]

the Scriptures declare, both unequivocally and emphatically that there is only One True God and that He alone is our only Saviour (Isa.43:10-13) and they also declare that the Father is the One True God, that the Son is the One True God and that the Holy Spirit is the One True God but that neither the Father, the Son nor the Holy Spirit ALONE is the One True God then the only reasonable conclusion, based upon all of the Scriptural evidence is that there is but One True God who is Tri-Personal [i.e. Father, Son and Holy Spirit] rather than Mono-Personal [i.e. the Father, Son or Holy Spirit alone] in Nature, who has incarnated as a human creature.


Simonline,

Where in Scripture does it state that the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit are the One True God?

 

[Simonline]

You are absolutely right!! It is extremely arrogant and imbecillical to believe that since the majority of christian denominations teach the doctrine of the trinity then it must be true.

The plain truth of the matter is that there is abundant Scriptural evidence to support the doctrine of the trinity and there is also abundant Scriptural evidence to deny the doctrine of the trinity. There are many Scriptures that cannot be reconciled with the doctrine of the trinity by any stretch of the imagination.

The only thing that is imbecilic here is your post.

The Trinitarian Nature of God is True ONLY because YHWH Himself has, through the Judeo-Christian Scriptures and also through His own incarnation as a human creature, revealed it to be so. It is for this reason, and this reason only, that, in accordance with the Divine Revelation that is the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, all of the mainstream orthodox Christian denominations teach it as absolute Truth.

Whilst there is much scriptural evidence to support the doctrine of the Trinity there is absolutely no scriptural 'evidence' (i.e. when it is correctly interpreted within the context of the whole of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures and not just deceitfully and dishonestly isolated from it's scriptural context in order to try and make the Scriptures appear to endorse a particular theological presupposition that the Scriptures actually refute) to refute it, otherwise YHWH, through His Scriptures, would be contradicting Himself?!

There are no Scriptures (when correctly interpreted and understood) that cannot be reconciled with the doctrine of the Trinity and the only reason that you believe that there are is because you have already decided, a priori, before even considering any biblical evidence, that the Trinitarian Nature of YHWH is false.

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

Simonline,

Where in Scripture does it state that the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit are the One True God?

If and when you read them (probably for the first time?) then you'll find out, won't you?!

Simonline.

 

[Simonline]

If the Father is the One True God, and the Son is the One True God than how can the Father be greater than the Son? Jn 14:28 "You have heard how I have said to you, I go away and am coming to you again. If you loved me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for my Father is greater than I." The Trinitarian doctrine cannot be reconciled with this statement made by Yeshua Himself.

How little you know and how much less you understand!

The Father is only greater than the Son, existing as incarnate (i.e. as a human creature). The Father is NOT greater than the Son existing as non-incarnate (i.e. as the Divine Creator (cf. Col.1:13-17)) because, although They are Persons distinct from each other They are still the One and Only Absolute Reality who is YHWH (cf. Isa.43:10-13; 46:6; 48:12; Jn.1:1,14; 14:6; 17:17; Acts.4:12; Rev.1:8; 21:6; 22:13).

Like I said, there is absolutely no biblical text that, when correctly interpreted and understood, is incompatible with the doctrine of the Trinitarian Nature of God or His incarnation as the Messiah. Unlike those who refuse to believe His Divine Revelation, YHWH Himself is not stupid and, unlike the theology of those who refuse to believe Him, ALL of His Divine Revelations are coherent and internally consistent.

If you're going to try and refute the Truth then you're going to have to do an awful lot better than this?!

Simonline.

 

[Kris10leigh]

The Father is only greater than the Son, existing as incarnate (i.e. as a human creature). The Father is NOT greater than the Son existing as non-incarnate (i.e. as the Divine Creator (cf. Col.1:13-17)) because, although they are Persons distinct from each other they are still the one and only Absolute Reality who is YHWH (cf. Isa.46:6; 48:12; Rev.1:8; 21:6; 22:13).

How can you read these words and make that statement?

If you loved me, you would rejoice because I said, I go to the Father, for my Father is greater than I

Are we reading the same text?

 

[Simonline]

what happened to no comment?

Those comments were addressed to 'Kris10leigh', not you.

Simonline

 

[Simonline]

How can you read these words and make that statement?

Simple, because, unlike you, I'm reading those words, not in isolation, but within the context of the rest of Scripture.

Are we reading the same text?

Yes, we are, but what you fail to grasp is that the Son (incarnate as the Messiah) is speaking to fellow human creatures as an incarnate human creature, so it stands to reason that the Father (as 'God in Heaven') is going to be greater than the Son (as 'man on Earth'). However, the Father cannot possibly be 'greater' than the Son Existing as the Eternal and Immutable YHWH (which is how He (the Son) brought the Creation into existence ex nihilo (from nothing) cf. Col.1:13-17 which explicitly declares that no created thing came into existence except as He (the Son (Existing as YHWH, rather than 'Jesus')) created it. That means that the Son (except as incarnate (i.e. as 'Jesus')) IS NOT a finite creature, nor is He 'God's son' because the One and Only Eternal, Immutable and Tri-Personal Divine Creator, YHWH CANNOT have offspring.

The 'greatness' of the Father in relation to the Son is ONLY in respect of the Son's Incarnation as a human creature (this is the bit that the Unitarian heretics don't want you to know). It is NOT in respect of the Son's co-equal Existence as the One and Only Absolute Reality that is the Eternal, Immutable, and Tri-Personal Divine Creator, YHWH.

Did you read the other biblical references I cited which backed up what I'm saying? Any verse of Scripture MUST only be interpreted and understood in the light of the whole corpus of Scripture and not taken in isolation to try and make the Scriptures 'say' things that, when correctly interpreted and understood, they actually refute. Another thing that the heretics don't want you to realize is that there is a huge difference between being 'Biblically based' and being 'Biblically sound'. During the temptation in the wilderness the arguments of both the Evil One and the Messiah were 'Biblically based' but only the Messiah's 'argument' was 'Biblically sound'.

Simonline.